Chronic IllnessNCT03239639
Randomized Control Trial of Advance Care Planning in Primary Care
A study testing Advance care planning education session in people with Chronic Illness, run by McMaster University at 7 sites in Canada.
Trial summary
Sometimes people with health conditions become ill suddenly and can no longer speak for themselves and another person (such as a family member) will make health care decisions for them. This means it is important to think about your wishes and tell others about them. This is called advance care planning. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 65 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Chronic Illness
- What is being tested?
- Advance care planning education session
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 61 participants
- Where
- 7 sitesCanada
- Study dates
- 1 Mar 2018to 31 Dec 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 65 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients being treated for serious illness in outpatient settings or;
- Patients who could benefit from advance care planning self-assessed or assessed by their physician
- Patient able and willing to identify a substitute decision-maker who will participate in the study
- Patient cognitively able to participate
Who cannot join
- Patient or their substitute decision-maker does not speak English
- Patient unable to identify a substitute decision-maker who will consent to participation
- Patient does not consent to participation
Trial locations and contacts
7 sites in 1 country.
7 sites in 1 country
Canada7 sites
Dundas Family Health Team
Dundas, Ontario
Michael West Doctor Office
Dundas, Ontario
Burlington Family Health Team
Hamilton, Ontario, L7S 0A1
St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton
Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 4A6
McMaster Family Health Team
Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 1H6
McMaster University Medical Centre
Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1
Juravinski Cancer Centre Pain and Symptom Management Team
Hamilton, Ontario, L8V 5C2
About this study
Official title: A Randomized Control Trial of an Advance Care Planning Intervention to Engaged Substitute Decision-makers in Primary Care
Sometimes people with health conditions become ill suddenly and can no longer speak for themselves and another person (such as a family member) will make health care decisions for them. This means it is important to think about your wishes and tell others about them. This is called advance care planning. When people have done advance care planning, if they become very sick and cannot speak for themselves they are more likely to get the kind of health care they want and it is easier for the people who make decisions for them. There are tools such as brochures, questionnaires, and videos that can help people learn about these things. This research is being to done to study whether using tools for advance care planning and goals of care discussions will improve how patients and their substitute decision makers do advance care planning. This study is a randomized trial. This means half of the people in this study will meet with someone at their family practice to talk about advance care planning and review some tools and half will get usual care (a Speak Up workbook). The study will 1) evaluate if reviewing the tools, and having help to complete them, helps patients and their substitute decision maker do advance care planning 2) if this intervention will encourage patients to talk to their family doctor about these issues.
Read the detailed description
In prospective and randomized trials, advance care planning (ACP) significantly improves outcomes including increased likelihood that clinicians and families understand and comply with a patient's wishes, reduces hospitalization at the end of life, results in less intensive treatments at the end of life (according to patients' wishes) and increases use of hospice services. Trials have not been done in primary care. In this project, we aim to determine the efficacy of a care pathway designed to increase the quality and quantity of ACP in patients and their substitute decision-makers in primary care. The study is a multi-site, patient-based, unblinded, randomized trial conducted in family practices in Canada. Participants will be patients who are determined by their physician to be able to benefit from ACP, and the patient's substitute decision-maker. Participant pairs will be randomized to immediate intervention (care pathway) or delayed (8-12 weeks). The intervention is guided use of tools and decision aids to clarify values and preferences for treatments in the event of serious illness or near end of life. The outcomes will be substitute decision-maker engagement in ACP (including self-efficacy for enacting the role), patient engagement in ACP, and decisional conflict.
- Conditions
- Chronic Illness
- Being tested
- Advance care planning education session, Wait list control
- Keywords
- Substitute decision makers of patient
- Medical subject headings
- Chronic Disease
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Advance care planning education sessionBehavioural
Administration of values clarification tool, elicitation of preference for treatment options, if preference for resuscitation, shown an educational video about cardiopulmonary resuscitation, summary document of values and preferences created by a facilitator to share with doctor
Wait list controlOther
No intervention
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Advance care planning education session | Experimental | Delivery of an advance care planning education session at the family doctor's office Receives: Behavioral: Advance care planning education session |
| Wait list control | Sham comparator | The intervention is not provided. Receives: Other: Wait list control |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Advance care planning engagement of substitute decision-maker
A survey of the substitute decision-maker's engagement in advance care planning
Measured: 8 to 12 weeks (6 weeks for patients from cancer centre)
Secondary outcomes (4)
Advance care planning engagement of patient
A survey of the patient's engagement in advance care planning
Measured: 8 to 12 weeks (6 weeks for patients from cancer centre)
Substitute decision-maker self-efficacy survey
A survey of the substitute decision-maker's confidence to make future decisions
Measured: 8 to 12 weeks (6 weeks for patients from cancer centre)
Decisional conflict
A modified short decisional conflict survey
Measured: immediately after intervention
Satisfaction with intervention
A satisfaction and endorsement survey on the process of the educational intervention
Measured: immediately after intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Aug 2017
- Study start1 Mar 2018
- Primary completion31 Dec 2019
- Study completion31 Dec 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (22)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Chronic IllnessStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by McMaster UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Participants are assigned in 1:1 ratio to intervention or wait list control group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 61 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- McMaster University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Queen's University
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Michelle Howard, PhD, Principal investigator, McMaster University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03239639
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 3714
- Status last verified
- Jan 2019
- First submitted
- 2 Aug 2017
- Last updated
- 20 Feb 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
De Vleminck A, Houttekier D, Pardon K, Deschepper R, Van Audenhove C, Vander Stichele R, Deliens L. Barriers and facilitators for general practitioners to engage in advance care planning: a systematic review. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2013 Dec;31(4):215-26. doi: 10.3109/02813432.2013.854590.
PubMed 24299046Teixeira AA, Hanvey L, Tayler C, Barwich D, Baxter S, Heyland DK; Canadian Researchers at End of Life Network (CARENET). What do Canadians think of advanced care planning? Findings from an online opinion poll. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2015 Mar;5(1):40-7. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2013-000473. Epub 2013 Oct 4.
PubMed 24644188Howard M, Bernard C, Tan A, Slaven M, Klein D, Heyland DK. Advance care planning: Let's start sooner. Can Fam Physician. 2015 Aug;61(8):663-5. No abstract available.
PubMed 26273075Rhee JJ, Zwar NA, Kemp LA. Advance care planning and interpersonal relationships: a two-way street. Fam Pract. 2013 Apr;30(2):219-26. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cms063. Epub 2012 Oct 1.
PubMed 23028000Robinson C, Kolesar S, Boyko M, Berkowitz J, Calam B, Collins M. Awareness of do-not-resuscitate orders: what do patients know and want? Can Fam Physician. 2012 Apr;58(4):e229-33.
PubMed 22611610Sudore RL, Lum HD, You JJ, Hanson LC, Meier DE, Pantilat SZ, Matlock DD, Rietjens JAC, Korfage IJ, Ritchie CS, Kutner JS, Teno JM, Thomas J, McMahan RD, Heyland DK. Defining Advance Care Planning for Adults: A Consensus Definition From a Multidisciplinary Delphi Panel. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2017 May;53(5):821-832.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.12.331. Epub 2017 Jan 3.
PubMed 28062339Houben CHM, Spruit MA, Groenen MTJ, Wouters EFM, Janssen DJA. Efficacy of advance care planning: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014 Jul;15(7):477-489. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2014.01.008. Epub 2014 Mar 2.
PubMed 24598477Teno JM, Fisher ES, Hamel MB, Coppola K, Dawson NV. Medical care inconsistent with patients' treatment goals: association with 1-year Medicare resource use and survival. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002 Mar;50(3):496-500. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50116.x.
PubMed 11943046Detering KM, Hancock AD, Reade MC, Silvester W. The impact of advance care planning on end of life care in elderly patients: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c1345. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c1345.
PubMed 20332506Hammes BJ, Rooney BL. Death and end-of-life planning in one midwestern community. Arch Intern Med. 1998 Feb 23;158(4):383-90. doi: 10.1001/archinte.158.4.383.
PubMed 9487236Silveira MJ, Kim SY, Langa KM. Advance directives and outcomes of surrogate decision making before death. N Engl J Med. 2010 Apr 1;362(13):1211-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa0907901.
PubMed 20357283Raymont V, Bingley W, Buchanan A, David AS, Hayward P, Wessely S, Hotopf M. Prevalence of mental incapacity in medical inpatients and associated risk factors: cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2004 Oct 16-22;364(9443):1421-7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17224-3.
PubMed 15488217Fried TR, Redding CA, Robbins ML, O'Leary JR, Iannone L. Agreement between older persons and their surrogate decision-makers regarding participation in advance care planning. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011 Jun;59(6):1105-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03412.x. Epub 2011 Jun 7.
PubMed 21649619Heyland DK, Ilan R, Jiang X, You JJ, Dodek P. The prevalence of medical error related to end-of-life communication in Canadian hospitals: results of a multicentre observational study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Sep;25(9):671-9. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004567. Epub 2015 Nov 9.
PubMed 26554026You JJ, Dodek P, Lamontagne F, Downar J, Sinuff T, Jiang X, Day AG, Heyland DK; ACCEPT Study Team and the Canadian Researchers at the End of Life Network (CARENET). What really matters in end-of-life discussions? Perspectives of patients in hospital with serious illness and their families. CMAJ. 2014 Dec 9;186(18):E679-87. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.140673. Epub 2014 Nov 3.
PubMed 25367427
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Feb 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized Control Trial of an Advance Care Planning Intervention to Engaged Substitute Decision-makers in Primary Care
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03239639
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 3714
- Conditions
- Chronic Illness
- Keywords
- Substitute decision makers of patient
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 61 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- McMaster UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Queen's University
- Study start
- 1 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Aug 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Sometimes people with health conditions become ill suddenly and can no longer speak for themselves and another person (such as a family member) will make health care decisions for them. This means it is important to think about your wishes and tell others about them. This is called advance care planning. When people have done advance care planning, if they become very sick and cannot speak for themselves they are more likely to get the kind of health care they want and it is easier for the people who make decisions for them. There are tools such as brochures, questionnaires, and videos that can help people learn about these things. This research is being to done to study whether using tools for advance care planning and goals of care discussions will improve how patients and their substitute decision makers do advance care planning. This study is a randomized trial. This means half of the people in this study will meet with someone at their family practice to talk about advance care planning and review some tools and half will get usual care (a Speak Up workbook). The study will 1) evaluate if reviewing the tools, and having help to complete them, helps patients and their substitute decision maker do advance care planning 2) if this intervention will encourage patients to talk to their family doctor about these issues.
Detailed description
In prospective and randomized trials, advance care planning (ACP) significantly improves outcomes including increased likelihood that clinicians and families understand and comply with a patient's wishes, reduces hospitalization at the end of life, results in less intensive treatments at the end of life (according to patients' wishes) and increases use of hospice services. Trials have not been done in primary care. In this project, we aim to determine the efficacy of a care pathway designed to increase the quality and quantity of ACP in patients and their substitute decision-makers in primary care. The study is a multi-site, patient-based, unblinded, randomized trial conducted in family practices in Canada. Participants will be patients who are determined by their physician to be able to benefit from ACP, and the patient's substitute decision-maker. Participant pairs will be randomized to immediate intervention (care pathway) or delayed (8-12 weeks). The intervention is guided use of tools and decision aids to clarify values and preferences for treatments in the event of serious illness or near end of life. The outcomes will be substitute decision-maker engagement in ACP (including self-efficacy for enacting the role), patient engagement in ACP, and decisional conflict.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Participants are assigned in 1:1 ratio to intervention or wait list control group
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Advance care planning education session | Experimental | Behavioral: Advance care planning education sessionDelivery of an advance care planning education session at the family doctor's office |
| Wait list control | Sham comparator | Other: Wait list controlThe intervention is not provided. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 65 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Patients being treated for serious illness in outpatient settings or;
- Patients who could benefit from advance care planning self-assessed or assessed by their physician
- Patient able and willing to identify a substitute decision-maker who will participate in the study
- Patient cognitively able to participate
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patient or their substitute decision-maker does not speak English
- Patient unable to identify a substitute decision-maker who will consent to participation
- Patient does not consent to participation
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Advance care planning education sessionAdministration of values clarification tool, elicitation of preference for treatment options, if preference for resuscitation, shown an educational video about cardiopulmonary resuscitation, summary document of values and preferences created by a facilitator to share with doctor | Behavioural | Advance care planning education session |
| Wait list controlNo intervention | Other | Wait list control |
Primary outcome
Advance care planning engagement of substitute decision-maker
Time frame: 8 to 12 weeks (6 weeks for patients from cancer centre)
A survey of the substitute decision-maker's engagement in advance care planning
4 secondary outcomes
Advance care planning engagement of patient
Time frame: 8 to 12 weeks (6 weeks for patients from cancer centre)
Substitute decision-maker self-efficacy survey
Time frame: 8 to 12 weeks (6 weeks for patients from cancer centre)
Decisional conflict
Time frame: immediately after intervention
Satisfaction with intervention
Time frame: immediately after intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Feb 2020.
- Results publication: PubMed 24299046De Vleminck A, Houttekier D, Pardon K, Deschepper R, Van Audenhove C, Vander Stichele R, Deliens L. Barriers and facilitators for general practitioners to engage in advance care planning: a systematic review. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2013 Dec;31(4):215-26. doi: 10.3109/02813432.2013.854590.
- Results publication: PubMed 24644188Teixeira AA, Hanvey L, Tayler C, Barwich D, Baxter S, Heyland DK; Canadian Researchers at End of Life Network (CARENET). What do Canadians think of advanced care planning? Findings from an online opinion poll. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2015 Mar;5(1):40-7. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2013-000473. Epub 2013 Oct 4.
- Results publication: PubMed 26273075Howard M, Bernard C, Tan A, Slaven M, Klein D, Heyland DK. Advance care planning: Let's start sooner. Can Fam Physician. 2015 Aug;61(8):663-5. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 23028000Rhee JJ, Zwar NA, Kemp LA. Advance care planning and interpersonal relationships: a two-way street. Fam Pract. 2013 Apr;30(2):219-26. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cms063. Epub 2012 Oct 1.
- Results publication: PubMed 22611610Robinson C, Kolesar S, Boyko M, Berkowitz J, Calam B, Collins M. Awareness of do-not-resuscitate orders: what do patients know and want? Can Fam Physician. 2012 Apr;58(4):e229-33.
- Results publication: PubMed 28062339Sudore RL, Lum HD, You JJ, Hanson LC, Meier DE, Pantilat SZ, Matlock DD, Rietjens JAC, Korfage IJ, Ritchie CS, Kutner JS, Teno JM, Thomas J, McMahan RD, Heyland DK. Defining Advance Care Planning for Adults: A Consensus Definition From a Multidisciplinary Delphi Panel. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2017 May;53(5):821-832.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.12.331. Epub 2017 Jan 3.
- Results publication: PubMed 24598477Houben CHM, Spruit MA, Groenen MTJ, Wouters EFM, Janssen DJA. Efficacy of advance care planning: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014 Jul;15(7):477-489. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2014.01.008. Epub 2014 Mar 2.
- Results publication: PubMed 11943046Teno JM, Fisher ES, Hamel MB, Coppola K, Dawson NV. Medical care inconsistent with patients' treatment goals: association with 1-year Medicare resource use and survival. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002 Mar;50(3):496-500. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50116.x.
- Results publication: PubMed 20332506Detering KM, Hancock AD, Reade MC, Silvester W. The impact of advance care planning on end of life care in elderly patients: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c1345. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c1345.
- Results publication: PubMed 9487236Hammes BJ, Rooney BL. Death and end-of-life planning in one midwestern community. Arch Intern Med. 1998 Feb 23;158(4):383-90. doi: 10.1001/archinte.158.4.383.
- Results publication: PubMed 20357283Silveira MJ, Kim SY, Langa KM. Advance directives and outcomes of surrogate decision making before death. N Engl J Med. 2010 Apr 1;362(13):1211-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa0907901.
- Results publication: PubMed 15488217Raymont V, Bingley W, Buchanan A, David AS, Hayward P, Wessely S, Hotopf M. Prevalence of mental incapacity in medical inpatients and associated risk factors: cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2004 Oct 16-22;364(9443):1421-7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17224-3.
- Metzger M, Song M-K, Ward S, Chang PP-Y, Hanson LC, Lin F-C. A randomized controlled pilot trial to improve advance care planning for LVAD patients and their surrogates. Hear Lung J Acute Crit Care. 2016 May;45(3):186-92Link provided by the sponsor.
- Johnston SC, Pfeifer MP, McNutt R. The discussion about advance directives. Patient and physician opinions regarding when and how it should be conducted. End of Life Study Group. Arch Intern Med. 1995 May 22;155(10):1025-30Link provided by the sponsor.
- Rhee JJ, Zwar NA, Kemp LA. Advance care planning and interpersonal relationships: a two-way street. Fam Pract. 2013 Apr 1;30(2):219-26Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Chronic Illness
RecruitingPhase 2
Tafasitamab With Acalabrutinib and Venetoclax for the Treatment of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Safety and Efficacy of Empagliflozin in Hemodialysis
End Stage Renal Disease
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Phase I Open-Label Safety Trial of Pembrolizumab for Neurological Post- Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PD1-PASC I)
Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
RecruitingPhase 3
Study to Assess the Efficacy, Pharmacokinetics, Safety and Tolerability of Atrasentan in Pediatric Patients With Primary IgAN
Berger Disease, Bergers Disease
Active, not recruiting
Symptoms and Functions in Patients With COPD and Chronic Bronchitis Switching From CIG to THS
COPD, Smoking
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Michelle Howard, PhD principal investigator
McMaster University
7 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Advance care planning education session in people with Chronic Illness, run by McMaster University at 7 sites in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Feb 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 7 sites in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Advance care planning engagement of substitute decision-maker (time frame: 8 to 12 weeks (6 weeks for patients from cancer centre)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03239639, which also lists 22 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 Feb 2020.